The ReeveLaw Blog

THE OPERATION: Beware of an operation being conducted by York Regional Police called Project Raphael. It’s stated intention is to catch those actively seeking underage sex.  It seems to be casting a very broad net.

THE METHOD: The method is to bait a target who is seeking adult prostitution services by posting an advertisement for adult sexual services in Backpages, Kijiji or a similar online service. When a target responds to the ad it is to a police officer who switches the age and poses as a female under the age of 18 years, specifically either 15 or 16 years old.  All communication is exclusively by text. The officer refuses to confirm anything by voice.  The order is to “arrest on knock”.  When the target arrives at the hotel/motel room they are immediately arrested, handcuffed, charged with a number of sexual offences and held for a bail hearing.

THE CHARGES: Offences routinely charged are “child luring” and “obtaining sexual services under 18 for consideration” both of which carry a mandatory minimum sentence of 1 year in jail up to 10 years in jail.  Both offences require registration as a sex offender for up to 20 years. 

THE LAW:  Firstly you need to know that communication for the purpose of engaging in prostitution is a criminal offence.  If it is with an adult there is a mandatory minimum sentence of a $500 fine, which also means you will acquire a mandatory criminal record. 

Secondly you need to know that the age of sexual consent is 16 years unless it is for the purpose of prostitution in which case if the person is under the age of 18 it is a criminal offence with a mandatory sentence of imprisonment from 6 months to 10 years and you will be registered as a sexual offender.

Thirdly if the fictitious person says they are underage then in the eyes of the law it is presumptive proof of that age.

Fourthly it does not matter what the real age of the person is or even whether such a person actually exists.

BE AWARE AND BE CAREFUL

Let’s not throw out the baby with the bathwater. “Experts believe that it could have wide-ranging implications for journalists and the media, and may allow people to sue over non-sexual images and unflattering words, even if they’re the undeniable truth.” We need to be careful that we’re not creating a bigger monster than the one we’re trying to slay.

The only thing worse than revenge porn would be bad revenge porn laws.

Source: Canada’s Expanding Revenge Porn Laws Could Threaten Journalistic Freedom | Motherboard

Let’s be clear about this. It has been the case since 1987. The results of polygraph tests are unreliable and risky. Police still use polygraph tests, not for the results but rather to put you through a process to set you up for a post-test interrogation when they tell you that you failed the test in order to obtain a confession, false or otherwise. Simple rule –> do NOT take a polygraph test.

Source: Can evidence of a polygraph test be used in court? | Provincial Court of British Columbia

It’s been this way for a long time. A “tough on crime” agenda, backwards bail court procedures and a chronic lack of funding has created inhumane and dangerous conditions in our jails. Now it’s costing the government where it hurts – in its pocketbook (i.e. our taxes). The Ontario government is now liable for a potential class action from inmates and it’s going to be huuuuuge.

They argued that constant lockdowns are cruel and unusual by denying them the ability to access prison programming.

Source: Two Canadian inmates won $85,000 because their prison was on lockdown too often

Mandatory minimum sentences distort the criminal justice process. It transfers power and control from the Judges (who are, after all, the ones who are supposed to impartially judge) to prosecutors (whose role is to prosecute). It allows prosecutors to extort a plea of guilty to a lesser charge from an accused person, under threat of proceeding with a charge that has a high mandatory minimum sentence, as Judges have to sit by, helpless to intervene.

(OTTAWA) May 5, 2016 – Elizabeth May, Leader of the Green Party of Canada (MP, Saanich-Gulf Islands), today introduced a private member’s bill in the

Source: Elizabeth May introduces private member’s bill to abolish mandatory minimums

At least it applies in law if not in public opinion. As you will recall there were some people (we all know who) who declared him guilty upon arrest without knowing any facts.

Actor who plays the character Bubbles on the hit Canadian TV series was arrested April 1 after an incident at a Hollywood hotel involving a woman.

Source: Charge dropped against Trailer Park Boys star Mike Smith | Toronto Star

A Brampton judge has acquitted a driver who failed a roadside breath test after accepting a former government scientist’s evidence that the device is faulty and the process used in Ontario flawed.

An Ontario judge’s findings call into question the integrity of the breath testing for impaired cases in Ontario, a lawyer says.

Source: Rejected breathalyzer test could have ‘great significance’ across Ontario | Toronto Star

Firstly, Anuradha Dugal, director of the surveying organization said “Obviously we’d like the numbers to be a lot higher” which is not unbiased or impartial and secondly “steps that could be taken to alter public attitudes toward sexual assault, including more education for judges and prosecutors and others in the justice system”. Who will teach them what and how will judicial education alter public attitudes? Thirdly, on what evidentiary or factual basis other than emotion or agenda do the respondents come to their conclusion? I prefer the 24% who responded “I don’t know”.

New survey suggests Jian Ghomeshi case hasn’t made people more skeptical of the credibility of women who claim they’ve been assaulted.

Source: Two-thirds of Canadians believe most sex-assault claims are true | Toronto Star

I’ve long warned people about the evidentiary use of social media in criminal trials and to be careful what they post but did you think that the “black box data” of your fitbit could also be used as evidence in court …either for or against you?

Tens of millions of people have bought into the fitness trend, wearing a Fitbit or similar wearable technology device to track their every move. But did you know you aren’t the only one with access to that fitness tracker information? And it could be used against you in a court of law?

Source: Fitness trackers can be used against you in a court of law | Clark Howard

The criminal code is fine. Generally, It presumes release from custody with an escalating plan of restrictions as necessary with detention being the last resort. The problem is “a “risk-averse mentality” has permeated the bail process.” That means that the Crown Attorney and the Justice of the Peace are afraid that someone who they decide to release will commit some terrible crime while on bail they will be held responsible through an inquiry and lose their job. Therefore it’s personally safer to keep people in jail.

“It is a problem across the country.”

Source: Canada’s Bail System Creating A Number Of Problems, Justice Documents